No 30.06

[rdcrags]

The sign at the hospital entrance said that handguns are illegal and you will be prosecuted; no mention of 30.06. I think that under the current laws and ammendments, hospitals do not need for a sign to be worded specifically to be valid. Is that correct?

[carlson1]

First Welcome to the Forum. The hospitals also have to post the 30.06 in order to keep out CHLs.

[txinvestigator]

The sign at the hospital entrance said that handguns are illegal and you will be prosecuted; no mention of 30.06. I think that under the current laws and ammendments, hospitals do not need for a sign to be worded specifically to be valid. Is that correct?

That is not correct.

here is the required wording;

"Pursuant to Section 30.06,
Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed
handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this
property with a concealed handgun"

The sign must be in English and Spanish, in contrasting colors and letters of at least 1 inch tall.

[kauboy]

Welcome to the forums. Stick around, lots of great knowledge floating around here.
And TXI is right, they must post a sign exactly as stated to keep out CHL carriers.

[RCP]

The above is correct. I work in a hospital (Plano Presbyterian) the only signs they have are not at the entrances of the building they have some signs at the entrance of various departments that read "State Law prohibits the carrying of a handgun on these premises" they are in both English and Spanish but not in the least in accordance with 30.06 guidelines. I will not be bringing this to their attention, as long as they think they have their bases covered and are happy about it then fine. An educated CHL holder will know otherwise.

[srothstein]

Hospitals are a special case and I am not sure the wording must match 30.06 to work. The more I think about it, the more I doubt it.

We have a conflict in laws that would only be met by posting two signs and I don't think that is what was intended by the Legislature. I knew that there was originally a requirement for signs to post a specific sign, but thought it had been repealed with the change to make it 30.06. It has not been repealed and is still valid.

Government Code Section 411.204 includes the following:

(b) A hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or a nursing home licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, shall prominently display at each entrance to the hospital or nursing home, as appropriate, a sign that complies with the requirements of Subsection (c) other than the requirement that the sign include on its face the number "51".
(c) The sign required under Subsections (a) and (b) must give notice in both English and Spanish that it is unlawful for a person licensed under this subchapter to carry a handgun on the premises. The sign must appear in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height and must include on its face the number "51" printed in solid red at least five inches in height. The sign shall be displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

But then, Penal Code Section 46.035 says:

(i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.

This would require different wording than the other code. To meet both sections of the code would require two separate signs. This is not sensible. So, I would postulate that if a hospital had either sign, it would be enforceable. Obviously, this would not allow a ghostbuster type, but if it is close to either of these, I would not recommend taking a chance and being the test case. I want it cleared up, but not at anyone's expense.

[txinvestigator]

Hospitals are a special case and I am not sure the wording must match 30.06 to work. The more I think about it, the more I doubt it.

We have a conflict in laws that would only be met by posting two signs and I don't think that is what was intended by the Legislature. I knew that there was originally a requirement for signs to post a specific sign, but thought it had been repealed with the change to make it 30.06. It has not been repealed and is still valid.

Government Code Section 411.204 includes the following:

(b) A hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or a nursing home licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, shall prominently display at each entrance to the hospital or nursing home, as appropriate, a sign that complies with the requirements of Subsection (c) other than the requirement that the sign include on its face the number "51".
(c) The sign required under Subsections (a) and (b) must give notice in both English and Spanish that it is unlawful for a person licensed under this subchapter to carry a handgun on the premises. The sign must appear in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height and must include on its face the number "51" printed in solid red at least five inches in height. The sign shall be displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

But then, Penal Code Section 46.035 says:

(i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.

This would require different wording than the other code. To meet both sections of the code would require two separate signs. This is not sensible. So, I would postulate that if a hospital had either sign, it would be enforceable. Obviously, this would not allow a ghostbuster type, but if it is close to either of these, I would not recommend taking a chance and being the test case. I want it cleared up, but not at anyone's expense.

S... I also gave considerable consideration to this issue. IMO, the bottom line is this;GC 411.204 is a requirement for the hosptial, and in and of istelf puts no limitation on the CHL holder.

PC 46.035 is the only code a CHLer could be prosecuted under for carrying in a hospital, and that makes it clear that 30.06 must be posted for prosecution under that section.

Sorta like the 51% sign really being irrelevant to a CHL holder.

Agree?

[stevie_d_64]

Agree?

Sure...Thats what I've believed all along...

Good summary!

[Renegade]

So the Govt Code requires hospitals to IMPROPERLY post a 51 sign?

I did not know they were required to post a 30.06 either, when did that come about?

ETA:

Further reading indicates that is the most sloppily written law I have ever read:

(c) The sign required under Subsections (a) and (b) must give notice in both English and Spanish that it is unlawful for a person licensed under this subchapter to carry a handgun on the premises. The sign must appear in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height and must include on its face the number "51" printed in solid red at least five inches in height. The sign shall be displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

So the "no handguns" sign must also have a 5 inch red "51" through it also? That is what it says. It also does not say it has to be a 30.06 sign, just a "no handguns", which does not apply to LEOs, CHLs etc.

ETA2:

My guess is that is a pre-30.06 requirement that was not updated when 30.06 became law.

[grim-bob]

So the "no handguns" sign must also have a 5 inch red "51" through it also? That is what it says. It also does not say it has to be a 30.06 sign, just a "no handguns", which does not apply to LEOs, CHLs etc.

Re-read section b. It states that it must adhere to section C with the exception of the 51.

[Keith B]

Hospitals charge a LOT for supplies. Maybe their price for alcohol makes up more than 51% of their income?? It could have a BIG markup!!

[Renegade]

So the "no handguns" sign must also have a 5 inch red "51" through it also? That is what it says. It also does not say it has to be a 30.06 sign, just a "no handguns", which does not apply to LEOs, CHLs etc.

Re-read section b. It states that it must adhere to section C with the exception of the 51.

RIF, thanks!

[KBCraig]

There is no conflict. The section requiring hospitals to post doesn't specify what wording they have to use, and a 30.06 sign would meet that requirement. On the other paw, they can post a non-30.06 sign, and still meet the requirement.

The curious wording explains why we see so many hospitals with a big red "51".